3 ms·
>There's no real knowledge to be found in them. Bit of a strong statement based on one personal experience. I'm a psychologist and find psychedelics extremely
by hoers 12y ago
>There's no real knowledge to be found in them.
Bit of a strong statement based on one personal experience.
I'm a psychologist and find psychedelics extremely interesting, both from personal experience, a wide range of other peoples accounts and a growing number scientific papers[1], especially Johns Hopkins University is doing some great work in that respect.
Maps.org is also a good resource.
[1]
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-006-0457-5 http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-006-0457-5
http://healthland.time.com/2011/06/16/magic-mushrooms-can-improve-psychological-health-long-term/ http://healthland.time.com/2011/06/16/magic-mushrooms-can-im...
http://hub.jhu.edu/2014/09/11/magic-mushrooms-smoking http://hub.jhu.edu/2014/09/11/magic-mushrooms-smoking
Edit: There is of course a lot of (mostly) anecdotal evidence for the bad sides of psychedelics but that seems to be attributed largely to the good old "set & setting" (and of course substance purity & quality). In traditional and especially medical contexts the occurence of "bad trips" and long term negative effects is extremely rare.
If you decide to try them on your own, do your homework, read up as much as you can and do them in a safe environment with people you trust.
- nwienert 12y agoUpvote for you, I meant no real knowledge in the machines, not the drugs. That trip alone changed my life, and opened me up to many new things. Just badly worded on my part. I think computers are a source of a ton of information, but no knowledge. I realized then that real knowledge comes from physical experience and thought, and never from studying.